Cycling: red lights

interstellaflyer

thelawnet wrote: »

(I did laugh the other day, when I saw a black cyclist, wearing black clothes, on a dark bike with no lights).

Don't get me started on this stupidity, it seems to be high fassion amongst the lyca terrorists to wear black lycra suits, with little or nothing in the way of contrasting or reflecting material, this is all fine and dandy durring the day time but a bloody nightmare for other road users at night, especialy when it's p*****g down, what is it with these idiots that makes wearing a reflecive jacket beyond them, ok they may have lights on their bike but lights are pretty useless on their own as in poor conditions it's diffecult to judge how far away that light is.

mazza111

thelawnet wrote: »

I think one of the problems is that bicycles are nearly silent.

I was riding along my road the other day, well away from the kerb as any sensible cyclist does partly because of incidents like this, and a pedestrian stepped into the road, to cross. She didn't look, I saw her, and stopped on a six pence in front of her.

She apologised, but basically she didn't check before looking and relied on her hearing, not her sight, which was a mistake.

Here's a cyclist doing what hundreds of thousands of motorists do every day, and going through a light two seconds after it has gone red. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0JYOIDmJvQ

The pedestrian is watching the red light, NOT the green man, and goes before the green man and the cyclist (who should not have gone through this light, since there were pedestrians waiting to cross, who should have priority) ends up swerving around her. She hasn't seen or heard him, and this obviously hasn't gone through the cyclist's mind.

Ironically if a car had done the same thing through that light, it is very unlikely that she would have crossed - cars are more visible and more noisy than bkes.


I try and practise common sense, and if that means for instance assuming the pedestrian who has stepped out into the road isn't looking where she's going, then I will do that, even if the legal priority is mine, but on the other hand I'm not going to stand there at a deserted pelican crossing waiting for the light to change.

Then be prepared to get fined or whatever. The green man signal was on when the wee lad got caught. As you said most cycles are silent in comparison to other vehicles. But of course why should he expect a cyclist to stop when he has the ok to cross......

Now I'm not saying you did something like this. But it goes to show some understanding as to why some people get rather narky about cyclist going through red lights. Whether there are pedestrians there or not.

interstellaflyer

mazza111 wrote: »

Then be prepared to get fined or whatever. The green man signal was on when the wee lad got caught. As you said most cycles are silent in comparison to other vehicles. But of course why should he expect a cyclist to stop when he has the ok to cross......

Now I'm not saying you did something like this. But it goes to show some understanding as to why some people get rather narky about cyclist going through red lights. Whether there are pedestrians there or not.

Isn't it funny how serious cyclists like to make everything someone elses fault.

custardy

interstellaflyer wrote: »

Isn't it funny how serious cyclists like to make everything someone elses fault.

do they?
I would consider myself a 'serious cyclist' if having 3 bikes and using it as my main mode of transport makes me serious?
been to the gym,collected pacakges from the RM DO and a wee bit of shopping so far today

interstellaflyer

custardy wrote: »

do they?

responding to thelawnets response to mazza111s post, aparently it was the childs fault he got ran over because he dared to cross the road correctly using a pedestrian crossing where he had the green man, the problem being that the child couldn't hear the cyclist, err no the moron cyclist should have stopped at the red light or at least taken a lot more care.

mazza111

Aye but u can't blame all cyclists because of a moronic one that my gr8 nephew encountered. I know there are sensible cyclists out there. I have came across them now and again. But back to the OP....


If as you say there was a red light and no pedestrians, would it be ok for any vehicle to go through that same red light? Sorry, but if you're going to use the roads while cycling, you have to follow the rules of the road just the same as every other person. You have no more rights than any other road user, even though a lot of cyclists seem to think they do. Notice I said a lot and not all...


Personal thoughts, I don't think ANY vehicle should be using the road without appropriate insurance.

thelawnet

interstellaflyer wrote: »

responding to thelawnets response to mazza111s post, aparently it was the childs fault

Who said that?

he got ran over because he dared to cross the road correctly using a pedestrian crossing where he had the green man, the problem being that the child couldn't hear the cyclist, err no the moron cyclist should have stopped at the red light or at least taken a lot more care.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with that.

No point setting up strawmen, they are very easy to knock down....

My point was that cyclists need to understand that they are significantly less likely to be seen/heard by pedestrians than a car would be.

That doesn't have anything to do with me going through an empty pelican crossing, but seeing as any thread about cycling is generally open season to repeat any tale, real or imaginary, about a cyclist who has done something wrong, ever, I might as well make the point here as anywhere else.

thelawnet

mazza111 wrote: »

If as you say there was a red light and no pedestrians, would it be ok for any vehicle to go through that same red light? Sorry, but if you're going to use the roads while cycling, you have to follow the rules of the road just the same as every other person.

I agree with that. I follow the rules of the road just the same as every other person, that is to say - mostly, but not entirey.

I don't claim 100% compliance with the law in my car and I don't on my bike either.

I drove my car yesterday, about 50 miles, I'm sure I broke a rule or two. And then?

You have no more rights than any other road user, even though a lot of cyclists seem to think they do. Notice I said a lot and not all...

No I don't think I have any more rights. If the police caught me going through a red light, which is possible, but not particularly likely, I'd accept their penalty.

Likewise, if I got caught speeding in my car, something that hasn't happened so far, but might in the future, I'd accept the penalty for that.

Personal thoughts, I don't think ANY vehicle should be using the road without appropriate insurance.

I've got insurance.

Note, as a matter of public policy, that the public liability risk created by cyclists is tiny and could easily be assumed by the MIB or similar, assuming it's desirable to do so.

I think the liability caused by pedestrians is probably greater however, but there's no insurance for them, so if they run out in front of you, drunk, you are SOL.

custardy

interstellaflyer wrote: »

responding to thelawnets response to mazza111s post, aparently it was the childs fault he got ran over because he dared to cross the road correctly using a pedestrian crossing where he had the green man, the problem being that the child couldn't hear the cyclist, err no the moron cyclist should have stopped at the red light or at least taken a lot more care.

your comment encompassed a large amount of cyclists.

Joe_Horner

custardy wrote: »

well if you look at the R2 on crazy random
it doesnt actually go out
regardless i have the solid as well

Yep, that works for visibility

thelawnet wrote: »

My rear light cost about £40, but I do run it on flashing. The flashing red light is as clear an indicator of a bicycle as a flashing blue is of an emergency vehicle, and this has safety value, to warn of a vulnerable road user. My experience tells me that my hi-viz jacket does a perfect job of making me visible in the dark anyway (I did laugh the other day, when I saw a black cyclist, wearing black clothes, on a dark bike with no lights).

As a driver, trust me, it doesn't where there's no street lighting and a flow of cars coming towards you so that I'm behind you, on dipped beam, and have all those lights (including badly set HID ones :mad: ) in my face. In those conditions, only the light will show up and a flashing light is almost impossible to keep track of in those conditions!

In fact, even without the cars coming the other way, the flashing light can become distracting long before any hi-vis shows up against the hedges round here!